Comments on: Status tags revisited

By: Resources for value stream mapping « kanban.la

Resources for value stream mapping « kanban.la — Fri, 01 Jul 2011 20:28:20 +0000

[...] updated much these days, but the articles are still very useful. I recommend this one and this one in [...]

By: havuz

havuz — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 09:35:56 +0000

I believe that tags are a good way of tracking ‘orthogonal’ data or ‘metadata’ of a card.

By: Xavier Quesada Allue

Xavier Quesada Allue — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 18:58:44 +0000

I prefer to promote a culture where people are cross functional and not assigned work by a manager or team lead. In that type of team there is no way of knowing who will work on the task next. Besides, for some status tags that doesn’t even make sense…

By: Andrew

Andrew — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 22:09:05 +0000

Instead of tagging I prefer assigning the task to a person who has to do the next piece of work within the task and adding a comment if necessary.
In work I use online board http://kanbantool.com

By: Pawel Brodzinski

Pawel Brodzinski — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 13:18:15 +0000

To be honest I prefer simple solutions over complex ones. Tagging board items is fine as long as you don’t need to retag every sticky note few times a day.

I understand “blocked” tag shines red and tells everyone that something is screwed with specific MMF, but should I put a tag every time I find a bug? And retag sticky note every time a bug is fixed?

Actually I prefer to keep Kanban board on a bit higher level. To check which bugs aren’t fixed we use bug tracker. To call a blocker we use our mouths: “hey, can’t go further with test on a feature X, please fix it ASAP.” And a columns we use are general enough that we don’t need to push cards back and forth between them as folks find bugs and fix them.

We use tagging to show who works on what, but adding small stickies supported with Scotch tape would be overkill. I prefer color magnets we put on our cards since they’re easier to use. Each team member has their own color so everyone instantly see who works on what. As a side effect magnets prevent cards from falling off.

By: Joshua Lewis

Joshua Lewis — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 12:24:32 +0000

I agree that ‘tagging’ works better than placing a card in a specific position.
I believe that tags are a good way of tracking ‘orthogonal’ data or ‘metadata’ of a card.

One way I plan to use tags is to track reword on a card. For example to track when a feature/card is returned to development from the QA team (we have function-based silos in our environment as opposed to delivery-based cross-functional teams). This way, we can track how often cards are bouncing back and forth between QA and development.

My reasoning for this is I don’t want to move the card to a different area, because the activity (development) is the same, I don’t want to create a new card because its the same item of work, but I still want to track the bouncing.

I suspect that there is an issue with ‘done is done’ and upstream specifications, and want to make it very visible that work is bouncing back and forth (one of the goals of Kanban Boards is visibility).

Typically, my cards are bigger than a post-it. On each post-it used to signify rework, I would include a short description of the ‘bug’ or reason for rework.

Pawel Brodzinski and I discussed some of this in the comments to his blog post: http://blog.brodzinski.com/2010/01/kanban-story-throwing-sticky-notes-out.html